#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Aug 14, 2014 20:36:07 GMT
Spinosaurus aegyptiacus wasn't the most well-suited animal for slapping, as opposite to popular belief.
|
|
mrirongolem27
Yutyrannus
Posts: 85 Likes Received: 0
Joined: Aug 14, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
inherit
124
0
Sept 2, 2014 17:02:52 GMT
0
mrirongolem27
85
August 2014
mrirongolem27
|
Post by mrirongolem27 on Aug 14, 2014 20:54:31 GMT
Spino wins nonetheless
|
|
mrirongolem27
Yutyrannus
Posts: 85 Likes Received: 0
Joined: Aug 14, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
inherit
124
0
Sept 2, 2014 17:02:52 GMT
0
mrirongolem27
85
August 2014
mrirongolem27
|
Post by mrirongolem27 on Aug 15, 2014 16:02:49 GMT
The documentary series "Monsters Ressurected" suggests that Spino absolutely crushed creatures like Sarchosuchus, Rugops, Carcharodontosaurus, and Paralititan. How much harder is T rex? Oh my... did you really just... if you are going to use Monsters Resurrected as a source I suggest you just leave this topic... that documentary was so horribly wrong and fanboyish. Get another person to say that and i'll shut up.
|
|
#00be0f
1
0
1
Sept 19, 2022 0:50:28 GMT
1,130
Theropod
12,650
October 2013
admin
Theropoda Entertainment
Ask through PM
Thero
Genyodectes
Eagle
{"image":"https://66.media.tumblr.com/bec0264f6aea4d9a0137ba0694abea69/tumblr_mmae6u05vY1relrdqo1_1280.jpg","color":"000000"}
460000
ff9900
Example 1
|
Post by Theropod on Aug 15, 2014 17:35:55 GMT
Yes, Monsters Resurrected was terribly inaccurate. Spinosaurus aegyptiacus being able to take a 7-8 ton animal down with a single slap (which is far from what its arms could do), as well as lifting a rather large Rugops primus apparently easily by using its jaws; does this sound accurate to you?
|
|
inherit
102
0
77
Monolophosaurus
My favorite number in the alphabet is triangle.
1,094
May 26, 2014 20:39:12 GMT
May 2014
captainjimmbob
Monolophosaurus
House Cat
|
Post by Monolophosaurus on Aug 15, 2014 19:27:30 GMT
Oh my... did you really just... if you are going to use Monsters Resurrected as a source I suggest you just leave this topic... that documentary was so horribly wrong and fanboyish. Get another person to say that and i'll shut up. Theropod said it. Your welcome.
|
|
mrirongolem27
Yutyrannus
Posts: 85 Likes Received: 0
Joined: Aug 14, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
inherit
124
0
Sept 2, 2014 17:02:52 GMT
0
mrirongolem27
85
August 2014
mrirongolem27
|
Post by mrirongolem27 on Aug 15, 2014 20:18:26 GMT
No, you're welcome.
|
|
mrirongolem27
Yutyrannus
Posts: 85 Likes Received: 0
Joined: Aug 14, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
inherit
124
0
Sept 2, 2014 17:02:52 GMT
0
mrirongolem27
85
August 2014
mrirongolem27
|
Post by mrirongolem27 on Aug 15, 2014 20:18:36 GMT
?
|
|
SiamotyrannusX
Dilophosaurus
I think I have a serious problem: I don't get enough sleep.
Posts: 42 Likes Received: 0
Youtube: youtube.com/siamotyrannusx
Skype: andruw.stewart
Favourite Dinosaur: Tyrannosaurus/ Tyrannotitan/ Eocarcharia/ Cryolophosaurus
Favourite Animal: King cobra
Joined: Aug 19, 2014 22:35:33 GMT
inherit
127
0
Sept 29, 2015 18:26:54 GMT
0
SiamotyrannusX
I think I have a serious problem: I don't get enough sleep.
42
Aug 19, 2014 22:35:33 GMT
August 2014
siamotyrannusx
youtube.com/siamotyrannusx
andruw.stewart
Tyrannosaurus/ Tyrannotitan/ Eocarcharia/ Cryolophosaurus
King cobra
|
Post by SiamotyrannusX on Aug 20, 2014 1:42:19 GMT
Here comes my (probably wrong) opinion.
When you look at the skeletal design of Tyrannosaurus, you can see adaptations that this was an animal with the build of an animal that was going to hunt big game. It lived with two of the toughest herbivores in history (Triceratops and Ankylosaurus)and in the southern part of its range it may have hunted Alamosaurus (I believe), which may have been one of the larger sauropods in North America. Compare that to Spinosaurus, a dinosaur who is not really designed for constant battles that may lead to death. Instead, we can see that Spino was less robustly built, which likely meant that is was not a dinosaur of full-on frontal combat. Those arms, while impressive, had likely limited movement (based off of relatives). They could not likely reach high enough to hit a vulnerable area (and certainly not down a Rex in one go). The way I see it is, while Spinosaurus was a tough dinosaur and undoubtedly would be terrifying in combat, I think that Tyrannosaurus would likely have been more than a match for it.
|
|
inherit
95
0
Nov 21, 2016 16:13:36 GMT
173
spinosaurus1
┌∩┐(^o^)┌∩┐
710
April 2014
spinosaurus1
fredrick alexander
spinosaurus
komodo dragan and tegu
|
Post by spinosaurus1 on Aug 20, 2014 4:13:46 GMT
tyrannosaurus skeletal design was not that of being able to take large game. it had a very limited gape. it was restricted to hunted armored, smaller prey for the majority of time. large sauropods were out of the question. and by comparison, spinosaurus lived with a lot more competitive carnivore species then tyrannosaurus. and the mass of tyrannosaurus is not in contribution to the weight as much as you think. spinosaurus was the overall heavier and denser animal. being both a megalosauroid and semi-aquatic, it's less pneumatic then tyrannosaurus. and might I add the only major restriction in theropod arms is the ability to reach forward. I give you that, but on contrary, they serve well as grappling tools. being able to grip and restrict with its massive gripping pressure and large claws, also aided by the mouth. its essentially apprehension and restriction. spinosaurus had the height and size advantage, which would mean its arms would serve use. it would then likely use its jaws to restrain the tyrannosaur and use it's arms to provide massive, possibly fatal wounds.
|
|
mrirongolem27
Yutyrannus
Posts: 85 Likes Received: 0
Joined: Aug 14, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
inherit
124
0
Sept 2, 2014 17:02:52 GMT
0
mrirongolem27
85
August 2014
mrirongolem27
|
Post by mrirongolem27 on Aug 22, 2014 1:37:35 GMT
tyrannosaurus skeletal design was not that of being able to take large game. it had a very limited gape. it was restricted to hunted armored, smaller prey for the majority of time. large sauropods were out of the question. and by comparison, spinosaurus lived with a lot more competitive carnivore species then tyrannosaurus. and the mass of tyrannosaurus is not in contribution to the weight as much as you think. spinosaurus was the overall heavier and denser animal. being both a megalosauroid and semi-aquatic, it's less pneumatic then tyrannosaurus. and might I add the only major restriction in theropod arms is the ability to reach forward. I give you that, but on contrary, they serve well as grappling tools. being able to grip and restrict with its massive gripping pressure and large claws, also aided by the mouth. its essentially apprehension and restriction. spinosaurus had the height and size advantage, which would mean its arms would serve use. it would then likely use its jaws to restrain the tyrannosaur and use it's arms to provide massive, possibly fatal wounds. EXACTLY!
|
|
mrirongolem27
Yutyrannus
Posts: 85 Likes Received: 0
Joined: Aug 14, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
inherit
124
0
Sept 2, 2014 17:02:52 GMT
0
mrirongolem27
85
August 2014
mrirongolem27
|
Post by mrirongolem27 on Aug 22, 2014 1:55:15 GMT
Here comes my (probably wrong) opinion. When you look at the skeletal design of Tyrannosaurus, you can see adaptations that this was an animal with the build of an animal that was going to hunt big game. It lived with two of the toughest herbivores in history (Triceratops and Ankylosaurus)and in the southern part of its range it may have hunted Alamosaurus (I believe), which may have been one of the larger sauropods in North America. Compare that to Spinosaurus, a dinosaur who is not really designed for constant battles that may lead to death. Instead, we can see that Spino was less robustly built, which likely meant that is was not a dinosaur of full-on frontal combat. Those arms, while impressive, had likely limited movement (based off of relatives). They could not likely reach high enough to hit a vulnerable area (and certainly not down a Rex in one go). The way I see it is, while Spinosaurus was a tough dinosaur and undoubtedly would be terrifying in combat, I think that Tyrannosaurus would likely have been more than a match for it. The mere fact that Spino lived for 5 million years while putting up with not only a ton of rival predators (yes, they were all smaller, duh, but more numerous????) but as well as some pretty fussy prey. It's simply far too massive, and T. rex might have hunted Alamosaurus, but remember two things 1. Alamosaurus is a sauropod, and even the most exaggerated speed estimate would still make it slow 2. Spinosaurus is a (insert most obvious answer here) and it's not just going to stand there and become the T. rex's prey, let alone die.
|
|
SiamotyrannusX
Dilophosaurus
I think I have a serious problem: I don't get enough sleep.
Posts: 42 Likes Received: 0
Youtube: youtube.com/siamotyrannusx
Skype: andruw.stewart
Favourite Dinosaur: Tyrannosaurus/ Tyrannotitan/ Eocarcharia/ Cryolophosaurus
Favourite Animal: King cobra
Joined: Aug 19, 2014 22:35:33 GMT
inherit
127
0
Sept 29, 2015 18:26:54 GMT
0
SiamotyrannusX
I think I have a serious problem: I don't get enough sleep.
42
Aug 19, 2014 22:35:33 GMT
August 2014
siamotyrannusx
youtube.com/siamotyrannusx
andruw.stewart
Tyrannosaurus/ Tyrannotitan/ Eocarcharia/ Cryolophosaurus
King cobra
|
Post by SiamotyrannusX on Aug 22, 2014 1:57:46 GMT
Here comes my (probably wrong) opinion. When you look at the skeletal design of Tyrannosaurus, you can see adaptations that this was an animal with the build of an animal that was going to hunt big game. It lived with two of the toughest herbivores in history (Triceratops and Ankylosaurus)and in the southern part of its range it may have hunted Alamosaurus (I believe), which may have been one of the larger sauropods in North America. Compare that to Spinosaurus, a dinosaur who is not really designed for constant battles that may lead to death. Instead, we can see that Spino was less robustly built, which likely meant that is was not a dinosaur of full-on frontal combat. Those arms, while impressive, had likely limited movement (based off of relatives). They could not likely reach high enough to hit a vulnerable area (and certainly not down a Rex in one go). The way I see it is, while Spinosaurus was a tough dinosaur and undoubtedly would be terrifying in combat, I think that Tyrannosaurus would likely have been more than a match for it. The mere fact that Spino lived for 5 million years while putting up with not only a ton of rival predators (yes, they were all smaller, duh, but more numerous????) but as well as some pretty fussy prey. It's simply far too massive, and T. rex might have hunted Alamosaurus, but remember two things 1. Alamosaurus is a sauropod, and even the most exaggerated speed estimate would still make it slow 2. Spinosaurus is a (insert most obvious answer here) and it's not just going to stand there and become the T. rex's prey, let alone die. I never stated that Spinosaurus wouldn't fight back. In fact, I was implying that it would have put up quite a fight. I'm just saying that Tyrannosaurus was more realistically a dinosaur Hunter. Spinosaurus hunted other dinosaurs, no doubt in my mind, but based off of evidence from relatives, we can infer that it ate both fish and other dinosaurs (inferences are not facts, mind you). Spinosaurus was successful, yes. Five million years with tough competition, but more often than not it may have avoided competition unless necessary. To put it bluntly, Spinosaurus was a vicious predator, but one who probably didn't need to fight as often as others. He was mostly piscivorous, likely eating dinosaur meat as well. It's not going to roll over and die, but Spinosaurus, even when it's predatory, didn't have very aggressive prey. Juvenile, young, sick, and small sauropods and Ouranosaurus, which could have likely outran Spinosaurus, couldn't exactly kill it with three horns or a heavy tail club like Tyrannosaurus had to deal with. TL;DR, actively hunting and fighting is what Tyrannosaurus was built to do. Spinosaurus could do it too, but it wasn't primarily designed for that.
|
|
mrirongolem27
Yutyrannus
Posts: 85 Likes Received: 0
Joined: Aug 14, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
inherit
124
0
Sept 2, 2014 17:02:52 GMT
0
mrirongolem27
85
August 2014
mrirongolem27
|
Post by mrirongolem27 on Aug 22, 2014 3:20:51 GMT
The mere fact that Spino lived for 5 million years while putting up with not only a ton of rival predators (yes, they were all smaller, duh, but more numerous????) but as well as some pretty fussy prey. It's simply far too massive, and T. rex might have hunted Alamosaurus, but remember two things 1. Alamosaurus is a sauropod, and even the most exaggerated speed estimate would still make it slow 2. Spinosaurus is a (insert most obvious answer here) and it's not just going to stand there and become the T. rex's prey, let alone die. I never stated that Spinosaurus wouldn't fight back. In fact, I was implying that it would have put up quite a fight. I'm just saying that Tyrannosaurus was more realistically a dinosaur Hunter. Spinosaurus hunted other dinosaurs, no doubt in my mind, but based off of evidence from relatives, we can infer that it ate both fish and other dinosaurs (inferences are not facts, mind you). Spinosaurus was successful, yes. Five million years with tough competition, but more often than not it may have avoided competition unless necessary. To put it bluntly, Spinosaurus was a vicious predator, but one who probably didn't need to fight as often as others. He was mostly piscivorous, likely eating dinosaur meat as well. It's not going to roll over and die, but Spinosaurus, even when it's predatory, didn't have very aggressive prey. Juvenile, young, sick, and small sauropods and Ouranosaurus, which could have likely outran Spinosaurus, couldn't exactly kill it with three horns or a heavy tail club like Tyrannosaurus had to deal with. TL;DR, actively hunting and fighting is what Tyrannosaurus was built to do. Spinosaurus could do it too, but it wasn't primarily designed for that. Plainly put, Spino put up with other hugely successful predators, like Carcharodontosaurus, Rugops, and Sarchsuchus (or Suchomimus? I get them mixed up) while T. rex put up with stupid things like Nanotyrannus. Not to mention that Spino's hybrid predatory style means it faces EVEN MORE competition. And not being designed for something doesn't necessarily mean that you can't do it efficiently.
|
|
inherit
95
0
Nov 21, 2016 16:13:36 GMT
173
spinosaurus1
┌∩┐(^o^)┌∩┐
710
April 2014
spinosaurus1
fredrick alexander
spinosaurus
komodo dragan and tegu
|
Post by spinosaurus1 on Aug 22, 2014 14:13:55 GMT
Here comes my (probably wrong) opinion. When you look at the skeletal design of Tyrannosaurus, you can see adaptations that this was an animal with the build of an animal that was going to hunt big game. It lived with two of the toughest herbivores in history (Triceratops and Ankylosaurus)and in the southern part of its range it may have hunted Alamosaurus (I believe), which may have been one of the larger sauropods in North America. Compare that to Spinosaurus, a dinosaur who is not really designed for constant battles that may lead to death. Instead, we can see that Spino was less robustly built, which likely meant that is was not a dinosaur of full-on frontal combat. Those arms, while impressive, had likely limited movement (based off of relatives). They could not likely reach high enough to hit a vulnerable area (and certainly not down a Rex in one go). The way I see it is, while Spinosaurus was a tough dinosaur and undoubtedly would be terrifying in combat, I think that Tyrannosaurus would likely have been more than a match for it. The mere fact that Spino lived for 5 million years while putting up with not only a ton of rival predators (yes, they were all smaller, duh, but more numerous????) but as well as some pretty fussy prey. It's simply far too massive, and T. rex might have hunted Alamosaurus, but remember two things 1. Alamosaurus is a sauropod, and even the most exaggerated speed estimate would still make it slow 2. Spinosaurus is a (insert most obvious answer here) and it's not just going to stand there and become the T. rex's prey, let alone die. tyrannosaurus was not anatomically well built to predate on larger prey items such as sauropods, especially titanosaurians such as alamosaurus. it had very powerful jaw muscles, but intern, a very small gape. its teeth are also very blunt, thick and lack very predominant serrations. key features that would be required for the dentition to be able to withstand the extreme forces that the jaws can exert. it was more suited for attacking smaller, armored prey. and might I add that sauropods don't rely on speed to defend themselves. their body mass alone can knock any wannabe predator to the ground, and the extremely muscular tail is a rather useful
this limitation can actually be referred to spinosaurus as well, being that it's dimensions would also prove restrictive for a tyrannosaurus to place a bite.
|
|
inherit
95
0
Nov 21, 2016 16:13:36 GMT
173
spinosaurus1
┌∩┐(^o^)┌∩┐
710
April 2014
spinosaurus1
fredrick alexander
spinosaurus
komodo dragan and tegu
|
Post by spinosaurus1 on Aug 22, 2014 14:23:10 GMT
The mere fact that Spino lived for 5 million years while putting up with not only a ton of rival predators (yes, they were all smaller, duh, but more numerous????) but as well as some pretty fussy prey. It's simply far too massive, and T. rex might have hunted Alamosaurus, but remember two things 1. Alamosaurus is a sauropod, and even the most exaggerated speed estimate would still make it slow 2. Spinosaurus is a (insert most obvious answer here) and it's not just going to stand there and become the T. rex's prey, let alone die. I never stated that Spinosaurus wouldn't fight back. In fact, I was implying that it would have put up quite a fight. I'm just saying that Tyrannosaurus was more realistically a dinosaur Hunter. Spinosaurus hunted other dinosaurs, no doubt in my mind, but based off of evidence from relatives, we can infer that it ate both fish and other dinosaurs (inferences are not facts, mind you). Spinosaurus was successful, yes. Five million years with tough competition, but more often than not it may have avoided competition unless necessary. To put it bluntly, Spinosaurus was a vicious predator, but one who probably didn't need to fight as often as others. He was mostly piscivorous, likely eating dinosaur meat as well. It's not going to roll over and die, but Spinosaurus, even when it's predatory, didn't have very aggressive prey. Juvenile, young, sick, and small sauropods and Ouranosaurus, which could have likely outran Spinosaurus, couldn't exactly kill it with three horns or a heavy tail club like Tyrannosaurus had to deal with. TL;DR, actively hunting and fighting is what Tyrannosaurus was built to do. Spinosaurus could do it too, but it wasn't primarily designed for that. relying on prey items in order to proclaim a predator as a better suited fighter is problematic and in many ways, inaccurate. theres too many variables. ant-eaters feed predominately on termites and ants, yet in many occurrences manage to kill omnivorous people and carnivorous dogs. what should be viewed is the anatomical adaptions seen in the theropods. spinosaurus seems to be most capable of killing almost any theropod as long as it has a size advantage. at parity, tyrannosaurus would have a very significant advantage and would most likely come out victorious. but against one of 10-13 tons, the spinosaur is just too much.
|
|